Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 18:38:23 +0200 From: "Hartmann, O." <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, arrowdodger <6yearold@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds Message-ID: <4E148F7F.5020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <20110706162811.GA68436@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <4E1421D9.7080808@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <CALH631=F4bSgNDE4w0qcXGMgGxZRRwCP9n-H4M0c%2B1UEaqWr7Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E147F54.40908@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20110706162811.GA68436@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: >> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing >> better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching >> back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler. >> > If you are using MPI in numerical codes, then you want > to use SCHED_4BSD. I've posted numerous times about ULE > and its very poor performance when using MPI. > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2008-October/026375.html > Worth a try, but most of my code I use is OpenMP, not MPI. The post is of 2008, that's three years ago and 9.0 is on the brink to become released ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E148F7F.5020209>